I have never advocated that the game should be run by plebiscite. But for such a major change in the game such as from winter to summer surely justifies asking someone what they think of the idea. AFAIK no such questions were asked. For me it was symptomatic of the way those who run the game treat the fans. I don't advocate a return to winter although I believe there were many advantages that we sacrificed in the move to summer that weren't taken into account. All I say is that the next time such a major change is contemplated, perhaps someone somewhere should take some thought for the fans' views.

but this is an example of it. Who decides when thi plebiscite takes place? Who is entitled to vote and so on and so on-see previous post forfull list.

I have never advocated that the game should be run by plebiscite. But for such a major change in the game such as from winter to summer surely justifies asking someone what they think of the idea. AFAIK no such questions were asked. For me it was symptomatic of the way those who run the game treat the fans. I don't advocate a return to winter although I believe there were many advantages that we sacrificed in the move to summer that weren't taken into account. All I say is that the next time such a major change is contemplated, perhaps someone somewhere should take some thought for the fans' views.

When I started watching RL, around about 1993, there was lots of talk of a switch to summer. IIRC Gary Hetherington was involved in drawing up a document that looked at it, as one of many proposals, and this was before Sky got involved in discussions over Super League.

Edited by nadera78, 26 March 2013 - 09:53 AM.

"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."
Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

When I started watching RL, around about 1993, there was lots of talk of a switch to summer. IIRC Gary Hetherington was involved in drawing up a document that looked at it, as one of many proposals, and this was before Sky got involved in discussions over Super League.

the original proposal was put forward by lance Todd in the 1930s. There was a strong constituency for it for decdes bfore it happened.

When I started watching RL, around about 1993, there was lots of talk of a switch to summer. IIRC Gary Hetherington was involved in drawing up a document that looked at it, as one of many proposals, and this was before Sky got involved in discussions over Super League.

But IIRC when it was proposed the overwhelming feeling was that no one wanted it. But we got it anyway!

"This is a very wealthy country, money is no object" D. Cameron February 2014

There is nothing about winter that created or aided the expansion, the expansion came from the fact that they had never taken the club game seriously. They essentially created a proper league system for the first time off the back of huge national support for Rugby Union, with internationals etc. This has been replicated in other parts of the world where Union has treated club rugby seriously for the first time, look at Australia for instance. The NRL has seen growth but nothing compared to the growth of domestic Rugby Union. This is not in any way to downplay the NRL as like us the strength was already in the club game and Union exploited an already large grassroots and international network.

RL in this country couldn't be more different than the RU Premiership, our game had been all about the clubs since 1895. Our biggest successes have always been in the club games. We created growth from an arguably already saturated market and a bigger growth than NRL clubs have managed (staying in their winter) since 1995.

What I find the dishonest about your reasoning is the fact that you treat your own speculation about what might have happened winter as if it is fact. You then oddly use this speculation to try and make out like summer rugby has been unsuccessful in comparison to it. We have no way of knowing what would have happened in winter and it is far from guaranteed that there would have been the same growth.

I've just done a back of a fag packet calculation: Wiki says 28 clubs have played in the English RU top tier since 1987.

By my reckoning 14 of them have been in proper financial difficulties, including actual going bust & administration etc, in that time.

I've just done a back of a fag packet calculation: Wiki says 28 clubs have played in the English RU top tier since 1987.

By my reckoning 14 of them have been in proper financial difficulties, including actual going bust & administration etc, in that time.

A 50% hit rate, in fact.

This is definitely what rugby league should be aiming for.

Surely that was inevitable when the game went honestly pro. Teams in the North especially who had been fairly dominant in the "amateur" days - Orrell and Wakefield spring to mind - could not continue when they had to pay players a living wage based on their poor crowds because of the lack of interest in Union in such Rugby League heartlands. Even well financed well run Leeds Carnegie can't get decent crowds to Headingley in order to sustain top flight status.

"This is a very wealthy country, money is no object" D. Cameron February 2014

Put it this way, before it was announced I don't recall fans at grounds or the letters pages of LE being full of letters demanding summer rugby. There were plenty of things RL fans wanted but summer rugby came pretty low on the list.

"This is a very wealthy country, money is no object" D. Cameron February 2014

Put it this way, before it was announced I don't recall fans at grounds or the letters pages of LE being full of letters demanding summer rugby. There were plenty of things RL fans wanted but summer rugby came pretty low on the list.

But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done - and in fact is completely different to the point you originally made.

But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done - and in fact is completely different to the point you originally made.

Fans weren't demanding a Grand Final, that seems to have gone well.

The topic was a regular topic of debate for years including the trade pressThis intensified when the RFL decided to take the game in that direction even more so when it became part of the changes being made with the advent if super league

It might well be that a majority of fans were against: it's impossible to know

But in any event it didn't necessarily mean they they were right since people often react negatively to change or anything that goes against their own narrow self interest

That is why we have a governing body that works within a constitution to run the sport

But you can't say what would have happened had we stuck with winter. That is the point. Not that winter is best - that it was never tried and no one was consulted. You just don't get it do you? I'm not saying go back to winter I'm using the example of the switch to summer - could there have been a bigger swtich? - of the way Rugby League treats its fans.

How is it any different than other, were Rugby Union fans consulted about the game going pro?

The point remains, firstly you can't call that a small rise in crowds and all you are doing is idly speculating (and I suspect implying) that we would have done better or just as good in winter. There is absolutely no reason to suggest that this would have been the case.

But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done - and in fact is completely different to the point you originally made.

Fans weren't demanding a Grand Final, that seems to have gone well.

This is exactly the point. IMO fans overwhemingly prefer Summer now which trumps any point that he is trying to make. If we had 'listened to the fans,' we would never have switched and therefore people would have missed out on something they ultimately prefer.

In my experience people that are in favour of referendums and the like only do so because they think it will vote in favour with what they would like to happen. Funnily enough you don't see Fundamentalist Muslims advocating for referenda on the implementation of Sharia law.

How is it any different than other, were Rugby Union fans consulted about the game going pro?

The point remains, firstly you can't call that a small rise in crowds and all you are doing is idly speculating (and I suspect implying) that we would have done better or just as good in winter. There is absolutely no reason to suggest that this would have been the case.

RU didnt have many fans before it went pro. However my guess is that there was a huge amount of debate at all levelsbefore it did

RU didnt have many fans before it went pro. However my guess is that there was a huge amount of debate at all levelsbefore it did

There was no debate within British Rugby Union before the game was professionalised. Right up until the summer of 1995 professionalism remained a taboo subject within the Home Unions.

Rugby Union was professionalised by the Southern Hemisphere Unions to head off a threatened unofficial breakaway by the Kerry Packer funded World Rugby Corporation that was intending to sign up the World's leading Union players for an unofficial competition. The Southern Hemisphere Unions then professionalised their players by signing them up on contracts financed by a TV deal with Murdoch.

The IRB, the British Unions and the rest of the Rugby Union World were then presented with a fait accompli which they were then forced to accept in the immediate aftermath of the 1995 World Cup. Professionalism was a complete shock to the Home Unions who had had made no preparations and had been actively resisting it.

If you are interested there is a good Australian documentary called "Stealing Rugby".